Judge denies Apple a retrial in Smartflash suit, but upholds decision to toss $533M damages against
A Texas federal judge has refused to grant Apple a new trial in its fight against a Smartflash patent infringement lawsuit, but simultaneously declined to reconsider a decision to toss $532.9 million in damages that were originally awarded to Smartflash.
U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap denied Apple's request on the basis that the jury's verdict was supported by adequate evidence and thus shouldn't be overturned, according to court documents. He also defended the validity of the disputed patents, and dismissed an Apple allegation that the court made a mistake omitting a jury instruction about prior art.
A document about the damages decision is currently not available to the public. Barring any new developments, though, a damages retrial should go ahead on Sept. 14.
Smartflash won a $532.9 million judgment against Apple in February, successfully pursuing claims that services like the iTunes Store and App Store violated three patents involving access to data storage through payment systems. In July, though, Gilstrap tossed the jury verdict, saying his instructions may have tainted the damage assessment.
Smartflash is typically considered a patent troll, as it doesn't actually offer any products or services. Instead, all of its income is derived from patent licenses and lawsuits. Apple has claimed moreover that Smartflash is exploiting the U.S. patent system without having a presence in the country, and contributes nothing to the economy.
U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap denied Apple's request on the basis that the jury's verdict was supported by adequate evidence and thus shouldn't be overturned, according to court documents. He also defended the validity of the disputed patents, and dismissed an Apple allegation that the court made a mistake omitting a jury instruction about prior art.
A document about the damages decision is currently not available to the public. Barring any new developments, though, a damages retrial should go ahead on Sept. 14.
Smartflash won a $532.9 million judgment against Apple in February, successfully pursuing claims that services like the iTunes Store and App Store violated three patents involving access to data storage through payment systems. In July, though, Gilstrap tossed the jury verdict, saying his instructions may have tainted the damage assessment.
Smartflash is typically considered a patent troll, as it doesn't actually offer any products or services. Instead, all of its income is derived from patent licenses and lawsuits. Apple has claimed moreover that Smartflash is exploiting the U.S. patent system without having a presence in the country, and contributes nothing to the economy.
Comments
Btw, no big corporate ever wins in Texas.
So that means more or less to pay for Apple?
Definitely f'n don't !
I mean, if Apple are guilty then they should pay - but if they believe themselves to be not guilty and can prove it, then take it to wherever they can get a fair unbiased ruling.
Definitely f'n don't !
I mean, if Apple are guilty then they should pay - but if they believe themselves to be not guilty and can prove it, then take it to wherever they can get a fair unbiased ruling.
Exactly. They can still appeal this ruling to higher courts.
...which they ought to - this is the East Texas patent-kangaroo court we're talking about.
Probably less but maybe not by a lot. There's nothing saying it couldn't be more tho, just not likely IMO.
Ok, thx. If the Judge feels that his instructions were biased, then I would expect the re-assessment of the damages to be in the opposite direction.
"three patents involving access to data storage through payment systems"
Wouldn't those patents impact other companies (like Amazon), as well? Has Smartflash sued any other companies with these patents yet?
Yep - you would have to think so.
Apple needs to defend this successfully.
Smartflash has also gone after Samsung, but the patents were to undergo re-examination in June, as some were felt to be 'abstract'. If the patents are tossed out, it's hard to see how the cases against Apple and Samsung wouldn't be dropped and all damages becoming null and void.
If not, Apple could always tell Smartflash to collect from the money owed by Samsung. That should slow collection down haha.
One thing you'd think Apple would learn by now is that they should file for all of the remaining untried Apple patent violation claims against Samsung (all of the ones that Koh decided SHE didn't want to hear about) in East Texas court.
California courts are garbage.
This judge is biased. He needs to be replaced or the case should move to other court.
Together with Lucy?
Here's the trick about infringement awards. You don't get your money back for anything you already paid if the patents are later tossed out.
Exactly why delaying paying is a strategy used by big corporations.
It would be ironic if Samsung's move to have the patents tossed, results in a benefit for Apple.
Together with Lucy?
She keeps pulling the football away at the last second.